That Bot wrote:I'll grant that the name "Generations" is rather strange. However, since Air Raid and the Wreckers all seem to be non-game characters...
These characters might not feature in Fall of Cybertron, but they use molds that were derived from that very game. Their aesthetics and alternate modes are very clearly derived from that particular incarnation of the franchise, and not from the G1 / G2 / Beast Era that Classics / Henkei / Universe / Generations normally draw upon.
That Bot wrote:While it's true that Beast Hunters has not introduced much in the way of new characters yet, this is generally consistent with past lines such as Cybertron and Beast Wars upgrading certain characters into new bodies (toys).
The difference however is that both Beast Wars and Cybertron created entirely new, radically different designs for each upgrade. At present, starting with the various movie-related lines and moving on to Transformers: Prime, it appears that Hasbro are happy to essentially keep reinventing the same wheel. There's First Edition Bumblebee, Robots in Disguise Bumblebee, Weaponizer Bumblebee, and now Beast Hunters Bumblebee; not to mention the half dozen straight repaints of these figures - and they are all fundamentally represent the same design, give or take some spiky bits!
That Bot wrote:Wave 2 gives us 4 ENTIRELY new molds (even for our returning characters)...
Yes; but entirely new molds representing the way that Cybertron Hot Shot, Scattorshot and Red Alert were re-envisioned as the Cybertron Vanguard Team, or new molds that look exactly the same as the old molds, plus or minus some transformation elements?
That Bot wrote:Also, Thundertron and Predaking do NOT follow the generic quad-to-biped pattern, as Thundertron's forearms are in fact only half of his beast's forelegs, his upper arms filling in the chest cavity left by the lion head. Predaking's robot legs form his beast body and his rear beast legs fold up inside of them in robot mode.
Thundertron and Predaking are very guilty of the quad-to-biped pattern; we are merely being more forgiving because their larger size allows for the transformation to be marginally more sophisticated. The simple fact of the matter is that Thundertron's forelegs form part of his robot arms, and Predaking's hindlegs form part of his robot legs.
If you really wanted to argue the issue, I guess you could make the point that Predaking transforms in a very similar way to the original four land-dwelling Dinobots, or to the three upper-torso members of the original Predacons. To which I would respond: is that really how far we've come?
That Bot wrote:Vehicle transformers are guilty of the exact same trappings as everybody criticizes beast bots for. How many transformations boil down to "stand car on end, unfold legs from back of car, pull out arms from side of car, fold car hood down to form robot chest"?
This isn't an argument about the transformation complexity of beast 'bots, though; it's an argument about the transformation complexity of Beast Hunters toys (or lack thereof). The simple fact of the matter is that the Beast Era contains numerous examples of creative beast-based transformations, and that so far, the Beast Hunters line does not.
That Bot wrote:...Even though Lazerback and Ripclaw have very basic transformations, they still manage to have cool tidbits in them, like how Lazerback's body splits open to store the beast head, and how Ripclaw's beast neck forms shoulder armor. I find that much more desirable than having beast legs just hanging off the back or sides of the robot (unless it's Big Convoy where you can pretend the mammoth rear legs are giant laser cannons in bot mode).
That's another false equivalency though - no-one is arguing in favor of robot modes that feature dangling extraneous beast mode limbs. That the Beast Hunters figures seen so far have found ways in which to avoid this particular problem is to be applauded; this does not change the fact that of the four figures mentioned, all use roughly the same tired transformation scheme.
That Bot wrote:I agree with you here. I'd be willing to pay more money for a better quality toy. I've got a preorder in for a third party Predacon right that's roughly voyager size right now for $75 and I'm okay with that because it looks cool as hell. I think the problem stems from non-fan parents who just see the pricetag and the size of the toy and compare it to the price of similarly-sized action figures.
I wholeheartedly agree. The problem seems to stem from the same confluence of factors: one, that Habro insists on conducting the majority of their sales through high street retailers; two, either Hasbro and / or said retailers are determined to maintain a consistent set of price points for what are, as you point out, wildly disparate products.
That Bot wrote:Indeed, while I think these are a cool idea that I have no interest in, and think they'll do fine, I could be totally off the mark. Who knows.
I imagine that they will sell perfectly well for a couple of years, and then Hasbro will quietly cancel the line and move on to producing a Transformers-themed imitation of yet another competitor's product. Money will be made; longevity will not be achieved.